FUNd,

You bring up some good points, however, I'm going to have to disagree with the non-exclusivity rule due to the following:

1.) It creates total chaos in the marketplace. So Broker A faxes back the signed agreement with a 5 point mark-up at 10:30 a.m., and Broker B faxes back a signed agreement with a 9 point mark-up at 10:45 a.m., the merchant accepted both offers, which one do you go with? The one that came in at 10:30 a.m.? But the merchant accepted the higher revenue producing deal from Broker B, why not go with that one? If Broker A and Broker B are down the street from each other, this could cause all sorts of problems including physical altercations.

2.) A deal exclusivity rule that lasts up to two weeks is fair game in my opinion, but I think a 5 day rule across the board is the best idea. The rule should be based upon the merchant moving forward through the process and if it comes to a point to where the merchant has stopped moving, with 5 days having passed, then if another Broker submits said merchant then they can take over rights of the deal. 5 days gives the Broker time to work the deal.

3.) If a merchant doesn't "like" the Broker they are working with, the ISO/Broker Support Channel of the Funder can always pitch in to help close the deal. Some Funders prefer brokers to just submit a deal and they will have their inside team handle negotiation, pricing and closing. I would rather a Funder do that to combat this situation, rather than not having a deal exclusivity.

I would personally never do business with any Funder that doesn't protect my deal submissions for at least 5 days. To me (and this is just my opinion) that is bad business.